Making expert processes visible: how and why theorists use assumptions and analogies in their research

TL;DR

This study explores how theoretical physicists use assumptions and analogies in their research, revealing cognitive strategies that can inform teaching methods for complex problem-solving.

Contribution

It provides detailed insights into the use of assumptions and analogies by physicists, highlighting these as skills students can develop to improve their problem-solving abilities.

Findings

Physicists make assumptions throughout their research process.

Analogies are used to generate ideas and solve conceptual challenges.

Analogies often involve systems with mathematical similarities despite surface differences.

Abstract

Understanding how physicists solve problems can guide the development of methods that help students learn and improve at solving complex problems. Leveraging the framework of cognitive task analysis, we conducted semi-structured interviews with theoretical physicists (N=11) to gain insight into the cognitive processes and skills that they use in their professional research. Among numerous activities that theorists described, here we elucidate two activities that theorists commonly characterized as being integral to their work: making assumptions and using analogies. Theorists described making assumptions throughout their research process, especially while setting their project's direction and goals, establishing their model's interaction with mathematics, and revising their model while troubleshooting. They described how assumptions about their model informed their mathematical decision making, as well as instances where mathematical steps fed back into their model's applicability. We found that theorists used analogies to generate new project ideas as well as overcome conceptual challenges. Theorists deliberately sought out or constructed analogies, indicating this is a skill students can practice. When mapping knowledge from one system to another, theorists used systems that shared a high degree of mathematical similarity; however, these systems did not always share similar surface features. We conclude by discussing connections between the ways theorists use assumption and analogy and offering potential new avenues of research regarding applications to instruction.